Terror Dry Run, Cluelessness Or Lawfare?

Was the incident earlier this week involving two airline passengers of Yemeni origin really a terrorist dry run as initially reported? Was it all just a big misunderstanding as is now being reported as claimed by the Department of Homeland Security? Or was it somewhere in between - an act of lawfare in an attempt to deliberately cause a stir that could later be used in an American court of law to support a claim af racism, harassment and anti-Muslim bias?

Something never really added up in the details available from the 'terrorist dry run' event this week. Perhaps now it is beginning to add up. Perhaps. After sharing the information known at the time in 'Dry Run: Al-Soofi And The Jihadi 'Unmanned' Aerial Drone,' that 'something' went ignored.

As noted by Pajamas Media's Annie Jacobson, the Department of Homeland Security began to backtrack from the suspicion of a terrorist dry run through the New York Times. DHS is unconvinced, after investigation and interrogation, that the men have any ties to terrorism. With more information than we can observe, we should take them at their word and judgment.

While Dutch authorities have released the two suspect passengers, Ned May at Breitbart's Big Peace cites an article in the Netherlands' De Telegraaf newspaper, saying that "One of the two men arrested at Schiphol [Hezam al-Murisi] was not only suspected of preparing terrorist attacks but also of arson. His lawyer Klaas-Arjen Krikke confirmed this Tuesday." The suspicion of "preparing terrorist attacks" referred to by May is almost certainly the current instance and not another in his past. Otherwise he would have almost certainly been on the terror watchlist and equally as certainly not recommended for Dutch release by DHS.

However, the manner of packing they chose is still suspect at worst, curious at best. The contents included a cell phone taped to a full bottle of Pepto-Bismal, a bundle of cell phones taped together, a bundle of watches taped together, two loose cell phones, a boxcutter and three large knives.

Not one of the suspicious (or suspiciously packaged) items, but all of them. If a dry run is to be ruled out, then this either indicates that al-Soofi is a completely clueless traveler just "packaging gifts" in a unique way as suggested to the New York Times, or that he put all of these items into his checked baggage in order to raise red flags and the expected response on purpose. The explanation of the former is ignorance. The explanation of the latter is most likely lawfare, hoping to spring a civil suit claiming anti-Muslim bias, racial discrimination and damages.

As if on cue, one of the suspected (or formerly suspected) passengers has a lawyer claiming damages already. Ned May translates:

The two Yemenis who were released Wednesday after they had been detained since Monday on suspicion of terrorism, have been greatly damaged. This is the conclusion of Klaas-Arjen Krikke, the lawyer for one of the two [Hezam al-Murisi]. "They have been put down world wide by name as terrorists. [...] But my client is very happy that he has been released," says Krikke. "He hopes soon to be with his family again. But what has happened here will not win the beauty prize. In particular, the Americans are responsible for that. Scandalous! [...] My client seemed to have nothing to do with the suspected suitcase. That was absolutely clear. Yet he became involved with the whole mess," the Dutch lawyer stressed. "I must say however, that the prosecution and the police in recent days have worked very hard to clarify the matter quickly. But the Public Prosecutor (OM) has had the courage to weigh the information honestly and then release the suspects."

No lawsuits appear to be brewing for the Netherlands. However, the United States is a different matter altogether. His Dutch attorney has perhaps telegraphed this in saying, "In particular, the Americans are responsible for that. Scandalous!"